The Risk of Not Being Resilient - NEWEA · Users score indicators or metrics (qualitative or quantitative) for the capability of the system to perform in each cell of the matrix

The Risk of Not Being Resilient

Cate Fox-LentRisk and Decision Sciences Team

Environmental Laboratory/ERDC

12 July 2017

[email protected]

Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®

US Army Engineer Research and Development Center

Environmental LaboratoryCoastal & Hydraulics LaboratoryGeotechnical & Structures LaboratoryInformation Technology LaboratoryHeadquarters (Vicksburg, MS)

Construction EngineeringResearch Laboratory(Champaign, IL)

Topographic Engineering Center(Alexandria, VA)

Cold Regions Research Engineering Laboratory(Hanover, NH)

Field OfficesLaboratories

2500 Employees

Research Laboratoriesof the

Corps of Engineers

Over 1000 engineers and scientists 28% PhDs; 43 %

MS degrees, $1.3B Budget Annually

Risk and Decision Science Team Boston, MA)

2


Risk and Decision Science TeamCapabilities§ Over 15 risk/decision analysts, scientists, &

engineers developing solutions that support decisions across broad gov’t needs.

§ State-of-the-science models and tools for structuring and conducting risk assessment, stakeholder engagement, resource prioritization, planning, and other emerging issues relevant to USACE, DoD, and Nation.

Current Programs§ Cutting edge R&D for DoD as well as for

DHS, DOE, DHHS, EPA, CPSC and others.§ Applying Decision-Analytic tools to evaluate

alternatives, bridge data-to-decision gaps, integrate stakeholder values into solution development, and prioritize research for a variety of technologies & industries.

We connect information and decisions.

Integrating Risk Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment, and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis models for the

assessment of emerging materials & risks.

3

Unclassified


4

Global RisksWorld Economic Forum2017

EmergingGlobalRisks

Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®5

Emergingthreats

Generateddata about threats

Risk Analytics

Time

Thre

at S

ever

ity

and

Com

plex

ity

Increasing Gap

Increasing gap requires innovative management

Challenge


State-of-Practice in Risk Management

Calculate needed height of seawall or dune

Ocean

Bay


• Further investment in risk will only yield marginal returns

• Insurance industry must value and encourage resilience thinking


Risk and Resilience: Thresholds

Plan Adapt

Time

Critical Functionality

System Resilien

ce

RiskAnalysis

Consequence

Risk

After Linkov et al, Nature Climate Change 2014


Importance of Recovery

9

From Linkov et al, Nature Climate Change 2014

t

t t

func

tion

func

tion

func

tion

Risk Reduction

Resilience through Recovery Enhancement


Manage resilience?••Not all

problems need to be solved

••Systems approach & integration of communities is the key

Future: Evolution of Approaches for Flood Risk Management


PIANC Working Group 193Resilience of the Maritime and Inland Waterbourne Transport System

§ System view: Environment is part of socio-economic-technical system

§ Consider both disturbances and stressors, co-occurances

11

Disturbance Stressor 1 Multiple Disturbances leading to Stressor 2

Modern View of System Functionality


Component vs. System

12

Calculate needed height of seawall or dune

Ocean

Bay

RA – Focus on Finding Weak Link:


Resilience: Political Importance and Challenge

Executive Order: "resilience" means the ability to anticipate, prepare for, and adapt to changing conditions and withstand, respond to, and recover rapidly from disruptions.


Management at System Level

14

Stockpile of sand in case of breach

Living shorelinesReef to

break waves

Consider climate change

Buried seawall

Raised infrastructure

Ocean

Bay

Potential for breaching from bay

• Anticipateweaklinks andbereadytorecover.Ex:sand toclosenewinlets.• Providediverseandredundant protection.Ex:buriedseawallANDbeach/dunesystem.• Ensureavailabilityofalternate networks.Ex:multiple electricalpowercircuits.• Provideaccessibleinformationforrapiddecision-making.Ex:raisedhomes,evacuationroutes


Risk Management Challenges

𝑅𝑖𝑠𝑘 = 𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡×𝑉𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦×𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒

§ Requires specific knowledge and quantification of all three components

§ No temporal component§ Modern system complexity and threat

uncertainty make risk management difficult and expensive.

15


Assessment Tools

16


Physical

Information

Cognitive

Social

PREPARE ABSORB RECOVER ADAPT

System DomainsDisruptive Event Stages

Scale

Home Neighborhood Town County Region State Country

cOnstructing the resilience matrix


Time

AdaptRecoverAbsorbPlan/PreparePrevious Cycle

• State and capability of equipment and personnel, network structure

• Event recognition and system performance to maintain function

• System changes to recover previous functionality

• Changes to improve system resilience

Physical

Information • Data preparation, presentation, analysis, and storage

• Real-time assessment of functionality, anticipation of cascading losses and event closure

• Creation and improvement of data storage and use protocols

• Data use to track recovery progress and anticipate recovery scenarios

Cognitive • System design and operation decisions, with anticipation of adverse events

• Contingency protocols and proactive event management

• Design of new system configurations, objectives, and decision criteria

• Recovery decision-making and communication

Adverse Event

Social • Social network, social capital, institutional and cultural norms, and training

• Resourceful and accessible personnel and social institutions for event response

• Addition of or changes to institutions, policies, training programs, and culture

• Teamwork and knowledge sharing to enhance system recovery

From: Linkov et al, Env. Sci. & Tech., 2013

General Form of Resilience Matrix

18


Assessment Process

1. Define System and Threats2. Identify Critical Functions of the System3. Develop Performance Indicators4. Calculate Performance Scores5. Identify Gaps to Prioritize Efforts

19


3. Performance IndicatorsExperts identify indicators of performance for each cell of the matrix for each critical function.

Based on resilience properties:► Redundancy► Flexibility► Modularity► Robustness► Resourcefulness► Distributed► etc.

20

Housing

Transportation

Wildlife Habitat


4. Performance ScoresUsers score indicators or metrics (qualitative or quantitative) for the capability of the system to perform in each cell of the matrix.

Metrics can be normalized to get relative scores.

For example:

21

Raw Value Normalized ScoreParticipation in mobile alert system: 48% 7.5Existing dunes/berms: 8’ 6Access to debris removal equipment: med-low 2


Coastal Storm Resilience Case Studies

Rockaway, New YorkApril 2014

22

§ Mobile, Alabama

March 2015

• Post-Sandy documentation• Influx of recovery funds• Specific Metrics

• Katrina-size threat • Previous resilience work• Expert / stakeholder scores


Results

23

Low Existing Capacity

High Existing Capacity


Project Evaluation

24

1. Building code improvements, enforcement

2. Replace bulkheads with natural revetment and living shorelines to mitigate erosion

3. Develop network of licensed contractors for businesses to access to rebuild

4. Reduce impervious surfaces in new upland developments

5. Continuing education on ecosystem services, fragility and human impact

6. Continuing education on public safety

1

1

2

2

3

4

5

6


Partnerships to Address Gaps

25

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

Physical USACE USACE USACEFEMA USACE

Information NOAAUSACE

Mayor’sOfficeFEMA

FEMANYCOEM NYCPlanning

Cognitive NYCPlanning

NYCOEMFEMA

FEMANYC

USACENYC

Social NYCOEM NYC OEMFEMA

NGO/Non-ProfitHUD

NGO/Non-Profit


Rockaway Regional Overview

26


Critical Function – Stakeholder Engagement

§ System has multiple functions, but not all of them are equally important► Stakeholder elicitation is required► Prioritization of project alternatives► Values, preferences► Public education

27“We want to include you in this discussion without letting you affect it”


Resilience and Social Vulnerability Indexes

28

BRICThe Baseline Resilience Index for Communities

Cutter, Burton, and Emrich (2010)

CDRICommunity Disaster

Resilience IndexPeacock et al. (2010)

RCIResilience Capacity Index

Foster (2012)

SoVISocial Vulnerability Index

Cutter, Boruff, and Shirley (2010)

SVISocial Vulnerability Index

Flanagan et al. (2011)


29

• “baseline set of conditions, from which to measure the effectivenessof programs… specifically designed to improve disaster resilience”

• “comprehensive measure of community disaster resilience”

• “resilience capacity”…“having higher capacity [implies] that the region has factors and conditions thought to position a region well for effective post-stress resilience performance.”

• “…tool for policy makers and practitioners [as] it shows where there is uneven capacity for preparedness and response and… is useful as an indicator in determining differential recovery from disasters”

• “improving all phases of the disaster cycle: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery”

Resilience Index Goals:

Social Vulnerability Index Goals:


30

BRIC

RCI

CDRI

SoVI

SVI


Not all indices give the same result

§If city/state/federal planners are going to use an index to determine how to prioritize investments, which indices actually align with performance?

31


MethodØ Partial validation of resilience/vulnerability score by

multivariate regression analysisØ Test sign (+/-) and significance of index in explaining

Damages, Fatalities, and Disaster Declarations

Ø Dataset: 10 southeastern US states• 2000 to 2012• 67,000 county-events • $170 billion in direct property losses • 3,394 lives lost• 7,625 declared county-level disasters


Summary of Results

33


Conclusions & Next Steps

34

§Number of Metrics in Index§BRIC: 26§CDRI: 75§RCI: 12§SoVI: 10§SVI: 15

§Users– look at the specific underlying metrics to determine suitability for your region

§Developers– clearly state the community functions/ stages of resilience index targets

§Next Steps §Find recovery metrics to validate the §post-disaster performance of indices!


Management at System Level

35

Stockpile of sand in case of breach

Living shorelinesReef to

break waves

Consider climate change

Buried seawall

Raised infrastructure

Ocean

Bay

Potential for breaching from bay

• Anticipateweaklinks andbereadytorecover.Ex:sand toclosenewinlets.• Providediverseandredundant protection.Ex:buriedseawallANDbeach/dunesystem.• Ensureavailabilityofalternate networks.Ex:multiple electricalpowercircuits.• Provideaccessibleinformationforrapiddecision-making.Ex:raisedhomes,evacuationroutes


Engineering with Nature

36


Natural and Nature-Based Features

37


References§ Sikula, N., Mancillas, J., Linkov, I., McDonagh, J.A. (2015). Traditional Risk Management Isn’t

Enough: A Conceptual Model for Resilience-Based Vulnerability Assessments. Environment, Systems, and Decisions.

§ DiMase D, Collier ZA, Heffner K, Linkov I (2015, in press) Systems Engineering Framework for Cyber Physical Security and Resilience. Environment, Systems and Decisions.

§ Eisenberg, D.A., Linkov, I., Park, J., Chang, D., Bates, M.E., Seager, T., (2014). Resilience Metrics: Lessons from Military Doctrines. Solutions 5:76-87.

§ Roege, P., Collier, Z.A., Mancillas, J., McDonagh, J., Linkov, I. (2014). Metrics for Energy Resilience. Energy Policy 72:249–256.

§ Linkov, I., Fox-Lent, C., Keisler, J., Della-Sala, S., Siweke, J. (2014). Plagued by Problems: Resilience Lessons from Venice. Environment, Systems, Decision 34:378–382.

§ Linkov, I, Kröger, W., Levermann, A., Renn, O. et al. (2014). Changing the Resilience Paradigm. Nature Climate Change 4:407-409.

§ Linkov, I., Anklam, E., Collier, Z., DiMase, D., Renn, O. (2014). Risk-Based Standards: Integrating Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches. Environment, Systems, and Decisions 34:134-137

§ Collier, Z.A., Linkov, I., DiMase, D., Walters, S., Tehranipoor, M., Lambert, J.(2014). Risk-Based Cybersecurity Standards: Policy Challenges and Opportunities. Computer 47:70-76.

§ Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Plourde, K., Seager, T. P., Allen, J., Kott, A (2013). Resilience Metrics for Cyber Systems. Environment, Systems and Decisions 33:471-476.

§ Park, J., Seager, TP, Rao, PCS, Convertino, M., Linkov, I. (2013). Contrasting risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering systems. Risk Analysis 33: 356–367.

§ Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D.A., Bates, M.E., Chang, D., Convertino, M., Allen, J.H., Flynn, S.E., Seager, T.P. (2013). Measurable Resilience for Actionable Policy. Environmental Science and Technology 47:10108-10110.


IRGC Resource Guide on ResilienceI. Linkov and M.V. Florin (eds)

§ The guide is composed of 50 invited short pieces with an annotated bibliography ‘for further reading’. It thus provides background information on the various perspectives and guides readers to other available literature sources.

§ Papers can be searched for key words.

§ They are listed by author and allocated to one type: concept, approach, illustration or case study; and one sector: engineering / infrastructure, ecological, social / community, business, cross-cutting view.

§ The guide was launched on 30 August 2016


Questions?

40

[email protected]

Documents

The Risk of Not Being Resilient - NEWEA · Users score indicators or metrics (qualitative or quantitative) for the capability of the system to perform in each cell of the matrix